How safe will tourists be in NSW National Parks

Not strictly correct. Hunting in Victorian National Parks is not allowed in general but there are a few exceptions only for game like deer and ducks in season. The hunting of feral animals is NOT permitted in National Parks according to the official link below.

You are allowed to hunt in state forests but under strict guidelines.

Where you can hunt in Victoria

They've been shooting in NSW State Forests for 3 or 4 years now. There hasn't been any problems reported.

I know there are strict guidelines relating to the licencing of shooters in State Forests, as well as restictions as to where they can shoot.

Others might be able to give more info but I know it won't be a free for all shooting anywhere, anytime.

The info that is leaking out to the media outlets, bit by bit, is all related to a risk assessment that has been written up relating to shooting in NSW NPs.
Any half decent risk assessment would be considering every aspect of would "might" happen. That's what they're all about.

Hoo roo,
Steve

Gold.

I used to be a hunter (quite good I would say) in my teens and 20s. Sporting shooters will have very little impact on ferals. Years ago I used to shoot pigs at Nyngan - on a trip on one property maybe shoot a total of six between two of us. No impact on numbers. Eradication has to be on an industrial scale.

Scott, would you impose this on all National Parks users or are you only 'targeting' hunters?

I could suggest that its the responsibility of all NP and State Forest users to prevent or eradicate weeds. In particular mud laden 4WD's, dirt bikes and horses that can carry the seeds of weeds and noxious weeds.

As for shooters, from what I have seen in NSW and Victoria is that the areas are well marked that shooters may be in the area, and shooters are limited to how close to the roads that they can hunt.

It still 100% safer than some of the Sydney suburbs...... lol

Hello, can someone explain to me why we are all passively accepting the fact that people with guns are going to be let loose in areas where they are almost certainly going to come across other people/hikers and not be aware that they are in the same vicinity, I do not have a problem with people who want to go out shooting, I do have a problem when I have to find out from, I am not sure who, where they are going to be, and so avoid them. amazed this has not stirred up more concern, regards Bill

That is a fair point and one that will need to be sorted out if this is to work

I'm confused Craig. According to some proponents of the idea this is just a small step on from what has been going on officially for decades (along with baiting for example) but you claim nothing or very little is ever done to erdicate ferals. The former is closer to the truth but employing professional shooters is expensive and depending on the target animal it's not a very effective way of controlling pests. I'd have to agree that kids with bows and arrow is a great idea though. I for one am thankful that farmers aren't allowed to wander into parks at will to shoot wild dogs and other pests. Such ad hocery would be irresponsible and ruddy dangerous.

Bazooka: will you please explain to me why you consider farmers shooting in National Parks more dangerous than farmers shooting in the State Forests which surround and abut them?

There is no logic to the blanket banning of hunting in National Parks, parks should be considered on a case-by-case basis.

As others have mentioned this ruling has simply made NPs sanctuaries for pest animals rather than the "Pristine Wilderness" people who spend their lives in the city and watch too many Disney films would have us believe.

Ask the farmers around Benambra (east Victoria) how many sheep they loose to the wild dogs which reside in the Alpine National Park which surrounds their properties. It's enough to threaten their livelihoods in some cases!

Safety wise; hunters have been shooting in State Forests since this country was founded and they don't appear to be littered with the bodies of happy picnickers clutching photographs of Bambi.

The thing is a beat-up by the press because the press is populated by latte drinking, city dewlling, Greenies who think "Guns are bad" and meat should only come from Safeway - killed by someone else, of course....

I said ad hoc, for good reason. There is absolutely nothing wrong with controlled (note the word) culling of feral animals by professionals in National Parks. It's been happening for decades, often in consultation with the farmers you mention - as I'm sure you know.


With regard to your littered bodies comment - there are shooting accidents resulting in fatalities every year and this policy simply widens the scope for the involvement of innocent third parties. You might be able to wear the possibility of an occasional death or injury as collateral damage associated with a new found individual freedom but I don't buy it one iota, even if the likelihood is very small.


Despite your opinion to the contrary there are plenty of reasons for prohibiting hunting by amateurs in National Parks. Not even the Shooters Party argues that this new policy will do anything significant to reduce feral animal numbers. Recent alleged actions by a senior member of the Game Council shows just how little respect some hunters have for following the rules and if you think there is nothing wrong with allowing bow and arrow hunting by anyone (let alone kids) in this day and age what can I say? Even if you are prepared to ignore the likelihood of bad and inhumane kills and incorrect identification of target animals (I'm not), the prospect of having amateurs with guns, licensed or otherwise, roaming National Parks is not something I would ever entertain as a sane policy.


Sue Dengate and others put it well in yesterday's SMH Letters page. Perhaps you think that Australian hunters are smarter and more responsible than their NZ counterparts and what has happened in NZ could never happen here?

Either you fail to understand the situation which pertains here in Victoria or you choose to ignore it because it disproves your argument.

Hunting of pest animals in State Forests by anyone with a firearms licence or an appropriate bow, at any time of the day/night/year has been permitted in this state since (before?) Federation. This practice works satisfactorily and there is no reason why it should not do so in (case-by-case chosen) National Parks. Indeed, in the Alpine National Park the hunting of deer has been permitted for many years.

--- "You might be able to wear the possibility of an occasional death or injury as collateral damage associated with a new found individual freedom but I don't buy it one iota, even if the likelihood is very small"

So... I can expect to see you campaigning for the abolition of:
Golf
Cycling
Swimming
Archery
Cricket
Bushwalking
etc

Every activity in life comes with a degree of risk and despite all the cotton wool you can buy you'll never be able to dispel that risk.

Unfortunately, in recent times, many in our society seem to think it's their duty to regulate others well beyond what common sense and reasonableness require, invariably they fly the flag of "Safety" in an attempt to justify their need to control. We need to refute and reject such notions lest we turn into a bigger bunch of wimps than we've already become.

--- "Despite your opinion to the contrary there are plenty of reasons for prohibiting hunting by amateurs in National Parks"

So far you've failed to indicate any, just some airy concern about safety which I dealt with above.

Bazooka: unless you are able to highlight different issues between hunting in State Forests and in (case-by-case chosen) National Parks then you have no rational argument, simply an emotional one of "I don't like it".

By the way; how do you feel about Aboriginals who legally hunt on tens of thousands of hectares in National Parks?

Interesting response. It's plain to see I've provided reasons for my objection. The fact that you don't agree with them doesn't magically make them disappear. Nor does the trite nanny state argument make them any less relevant. It may be very appealing to the "I" generation and rednecks but it leaks like a sieve whenever you look at facts, no matter what the subject. Advanced societies function on the principle of the greater good. This necessarily results in the curbing of certain individual behaviours and we can be extremely grateful for that. Not being able to carry firearms and shoot in parks set aside essentially for conservation is a terrible blight on individual freedom I'll grant you that. Makes you wonder why the masses aren't revolting doesn't it? Any ideas why many farmers don't allow hunters on their properties? Perhaps they don't trust hunters in many cases? Just a thought.


There are on average 26 accidental deaths from firearms every year in this country. If hunters can't look after themselves why should the public have any confidence that they can look after other park users, let alone the fauna? Even the best-trained can make mistakes as Sue Dengate's letter so ably demonstrated. One mistake is one too many where guns are concerned.

Bob,
they should seek out one of Huddy's scraper operators. You could see where he went bush and 9 little piggies went to piggy heaven that day. LOL.

RA.

Hi Bob,

That seems to be a sensible approach - close the park for short time and make a concerted effort to get rid of the ferals.

Cheers,

Val

I drove all the way down to the park at Bungonia Gorge near Goulburn and it was closed because shooters were doing a cull. That was a few years ago. My question is, if pro shooters have the park closed why is it ok to open for amateurs?

I drove all the way down to the park at Bungonia Gorge near Goulburn and it was closed because shooters were doing a cull. That was a few years ago. My question is, if pro shooters have the park closed why is it ok to open for amateurs?

O'Farrell has ruled out using silencers (see News.com this morning)

Personally I would much rather be able to hear that there are shooters in my vicinity. That way I would be able to POQ and minimise any risks.

Disco.

Even as a hunter I do not agree with silencers. These are already illegal, so making them available will open the doors to other problems involving them that does not include hunting.

Wrongway, I think live up to your name...it's the Liberal Party that needed the Shooters support for its electricity privatization scheme. :-)

Article here

ROFL. On yer Bazza, don't let the facts get in the way of your opinion mate. The NSW ALP sold its soul to many rent seekers over the years but the Shooters Party wasn't among them.

This news item about illegal shooting in parks -link here - suggests that this matter might have a way to run yet.

Val.